Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant had continuing duty to warn of hazards of asbestos after exposure
• holding that defendant had continuing duty to warn of hazards of asbestos after exposure
• noting that the use of the product, which gave rise to injury, must be one that is foreseeable to the manufacturer
• applying the substantial factor test when there is no doubt that asbestos was the cause of a plaintiffs asbestosis, but the plaintiff cannot identify which manufacturer is responsible
• applying the substantial factor test when there is no doubt that asbestos was the cause of a plaintiffs asbestosis, but the plaintiff cannot identify which manufacturer is responsible
• applying the substantial factor test when there is no doubt that asbestos was the cause of a plaintiff’s asbestosis, but the plaintiff cannot identify which manufacturer is responsible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).